Hijab Ban- Karnataka High Court Full Bench Hearing (Day 8)- LIVE UPDATES

AG : According to me that arguments is mutually destructive to argument of Article 25. If their argument accepted, persons who do not want to wear hijab will have the right to not wear also. It would mean there is element of option.

AG : G: Lordhsips must have noticed one argument of petition. They say they trace their right independently to Article 19 (1) (a)..to wear the right as a free expression..

Justice Dixit: What you mean to say it should be very focal to the religion?

AG: Yes ,fundamental to the religion.

AG : What is optional is not compulsory; What is not compulsory is not obligatory; What is not obligatory is not essential.

AG : I read this judgment (Qureshi) to show that it has said reading of Quran has shown that sacrifice of cow on that day is not obligatory. The very fact of an option seems to run counter to an obligatory duty.

AG : It is for the petitioners to demonstrate beyond doubt as to what is compulsory to be followed. During the course of hearing, court asked petitioners, what is obligatory and what is optional. I feel it is for them to satisfy your lordships.

AG: I have cited this judgement to drive home the point...

Justice Dixit : ...on pleadings being insufficient.

AG quotes from Qureshi case : "We have, however, no material on the record before us which will enable us to say, in the face of the foregoing facts, that the sacrifice of a cow on that day is an obligatory overt act for a Mussalman to exhibit his religious belief and idea"

AG quotes from Qureshi case : "We have no affidavit before us by any Maulana explaining the implications of those Verses or throwing any light on this problem".

AG quotes from Qureshi case : "No affidavit has been filed by any person specially competent to expound the relevant tenets of Islam. 'No reference 'is made in the petition to any particular Surah of the Holy Quran which, in terms, requires the sacrifice of a cow".